KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 I'm glad you support Newton and your school, as you should, but the fact remains you believe Newton and Auburn would never tell a lie while Miss St. is telling a bunch of lies. You should work for the FBI or CIA with that talent.I'm sorry but the only people who know the truth are those involved, you nor anyone else on here can know what happened first hand so it's all rumor at this point. The only fact confirmed so far is that Miss St reported Auburn and the Newtons and Rogers for recruiting violations. Outside of that you and me don't know what is fact and what is fiction.The NCAA snooping around isn't a good thing. AJ Green had this same thing happen and the false rumors of him being in Miami actually led to the investigation where the jersey sell was discovered. Cam Newton could get busted for something he did that has nothing to do with what is being reported. Lets put it this way, with his track record so far, I wouldn't be money that he is squeaky clean, but I'm impressed you would.And the fact remains that MSU would never tell a lie while AU and the Newtons have told a bunch of lies. But what we do know is that John Bond did lie about talking to Kenny Rogers, which is what everything stems from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 The most compelling evidence to me is that Cam Newton remains eligible to play football for Auburn university Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 And the fact remains that MSU would never tell a lie while AU and the Newtons have told a bunch of lies. But what we do know is that John Bond did lie about talking to Kenny Rogers, which is what everything stems from.Well...in this situation, the guilty party lying is more plausible than the accuser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Well...in this situation, the guilty party lying is more plausible than the accuser.Even though the accuser has already lied? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 The most compelling evidence to me is that Cam Newton remains eligible to play football for Auburn universityWhy would the NCAA declare him ineligible before they finished with their investigation? And would you even expect Auburn to sit him in anticipation of something? He's already played in 8-9 games (whatever the amount is) this season, and they'd vacate all of those wins. Two to three more vacated wins is nothing if he is indeed found guilty of all of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Even though the accuser has already lied?What is this based on? An Auburn blogger's report? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Why would the NCAA declare him ineligible before they finished with their investigation? And would you even expect Auburn to sit him in anticipation of something? He's already played in 8-9 games (whatever the amount is) this season, and they'd vacate all of those wins. Two to three more vacated wins is nothing if he is indeed found guilty of all of this.Auburn knew about the allegations in July, if the compliance department had any problems he would not have played against Arky St. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 What is this based on? An Auburn blogger's report?No this is based on John Bonds own admission on 680 that he never talked to Rogers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Auburn knew about the allegations in July, if the compliance department had any problems he would not have played against Arky St.This makes no sense whatsoever. If Auburn paid him to play, then why would they report themselves? That's not how it works my friend, and thinking that it does is just stupid, if not insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 No this is based on John Bonds own admission on 680 that he never talked to RogersI'd love to hear this if you have a clip of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 I'd love to hear this if you have a clip of it.http://blogs.clarionledger.com/msu/2010/11/05/bond-speaks-publicly-on-newton-allegations/Theres the transcripthttp://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=87&c=673&f=62082There's the link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Pickle1 Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 The most compelling evidence to me is that Cam Newton remains eligible to play football for Auburn universityLike Reggie played for USC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Like Reggie played for USC?The situations are incredibly similar aren't they Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Pickle1 Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 And everything else I mentioned?I addressed that too, but it really isn't important:The key issue for belief/disbelief has to revolve around those phone conversations. That is where the rubber meets the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Pickle1 Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 The most compelling evidence to me is that Cam Newton remains eligible to play football for Auburn universityCould you perhaps outline your scenario of what happens, most specifically as it pertains to the phone conversations. You seem very convinced that Newton didn't do anything, so you must have a compelling version of what happened that explains the phone conversations, the FBI involvement, and the non denial denials from Newton Sr and Cameron? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Pickle1 Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 The situations are incredibly similar aren't theyYeah, they definitely are, in some ways, anyway. The basic point of what I was saying is, that it seems hard to believe that Carrol didn't know anything about what Bush was doing, when you had agents at practice...and they didn't sit Bush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 This makes no sense whatsoever. If Auburn paid him to play, then why would they report themselves? That's not how it works my friend, and thinking that it does is just stupid, if not insane.If they did and they felt as if they were caught he would have never taken the field against Arky St. what would be stupid is to play a player that they felt would be ineligible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 http://blogs.clarionledger.com/msu/2010/11/05/bond-speaks-publicly-on-newton-allegations/Theres the transcripthttp://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=87&c=673&f=62082There's the linkReally? I am going to assume that you just misread it, but go back and look at the transcript. " I HADN'T heard from him in a long time." Keyword there being hadn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Ocean Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 I'm no lawyer (I prefer to make my living honestly and my soul is still intact ) but isn't conspiracy to commit a crime often considered about as bad as actually committing a crime? Maybe that's not the case for NCAA investigators, but I would think it would be for the FBI. So finding the actual money trail may not be that important. But if there was a money trail, then I'm sure the feds have forensic accountants who could find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isosceles Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Auburn fans are playing their violins, all the while the Titanic is sinking.CrimsonKat you have a way with words. That was so funny! J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Really? I am going to assume that you just misread it, but go back and look at the transcript. " I HADN'T heard from him in a long time." Keyword there being hadn't.And this?"Actually, there two people in between it but, basically, yes, that’s what happened"Not to mention Kenny Rogers said on 790 that he never contacted Bond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Yeah, they definitely are, in some ways, anyway. The basic point of what I was saying is, that it seems hard to believe that Carrol didn't know anything about what Bush was doing, when you had agents at practice...and they didn't sit Bush.Really? When did the allegations surface? That's the difference is that Reggie had already played during the investigation while the allegations in this case occured before Cam even touched the field. Let us not forgot Auburn has yet to receive a LOI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLBrave Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 And this?"Actually, there two people in between it but, basically, yes, that’s what happened"Not to mention Kenny Rogers said on 790 that he never contacted BondThose two people...................................................Cecil and Cam Newton? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Pickle1 Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Really? When did the allegations surface? That's the difference is that Reggie had already played during the investigation while the allegations in this case occured before Cam even touched the field. Let us not forgot Auburn has yet to receive a LOISo, in the bush case, he played before there was a LOI, and in the Cam case, he's playing now before they received LOI....so what's the difference again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepItDownHomeCuz Posted November 11, 2010 Share Posted November 11, 2010 Those two people...................................................Cecil and Cam Newton?So John Bond heard from Cecil and Cam Newton that Kenny Rogers heard from Cecil and Cam Newton wanted 180k????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.